Advice for macro beginner

[J1G4R]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

 

[Leonard Migliore]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

Reversing rings are no fun on Canons because you can't set the f/stop. I would suggest either extension tubes or an achromatic close-up lens. Those will get you started.

 

[D Cox]

Get a good close up attachment lens. Marumi and Raynox are good makes.

 

[J1G4R]

I tried this . Just held 18-55 reversed against camera without flash. I know flash would have made it better.still need tips

 

[BBbuilder467]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

With the AF lenses you have now, the AF extension tubes would be the most practical.

Along with the 50mm prime lens, it would be relatively simple to explain how macro works step by step.

Just about everyone has started macro with a similar combination.

 

[photosen]

How about a used macro lens? I had extension tubes but it didn't work for me, finally got an older Tamron 90mm macro.

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I agree that reversing the lens is hard work. Extension tubes are much easier but beware ...

... you need to get auto tubes to be able to set aperture with your lenses. These tubes are quite expensive. You'll see really cheap tubes on sale and they are fine with older lenses that have aperture rings. So ...

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

... you have some hard decisions. Cheap extension tubes are no use to you unless you also buy a (second hand) lens with aperture ring. For the same sort of price you can probably find a second hand macro lens. Note that neither need have autofocus - most macro shots are focused manually.

Or you buy a reversing ring and struggle with aperture, focus and lighting. Unless you buy a flash gun - but that's expense too.

 

[viperkeeper]

My rule of thumb is extension tubes for anything under 50mm and Raynox 250 for anything over. So I'd go with tubes. Reversing a lens can be difficult to work with but a reverse adapter is cheap so if you want to go for it. I have a few macro lenses but I usually just carry tubes and a reverse adapter.

 

[Goethe]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

My advice would be to just buy a good quality old manual focus lens, around 50mm, in one of the mounts that can be adapted to Canon. These included Contax/Yashica, Nikon, Olympus OM, M42, etc.

Then all you need to do is purchase a Canon to (whatever mount you choose) adapter. Throw in an inexpensive set of extension tubes for said mount and you are ready to go.

If you have any concern that old lenses wont be any good....have no fears. Here are some examples of my macro work. About 96% of these were shot with old adapted manual focus film lenses from the 1960's thru the 1980's. Camera was a Sony a7.

Macro - Photo Lumiere

This gallery hosted by SmugMug; your photos look better here.

www.photolumiere.net

Here is a put together kit I found after just a short time searching.

Yashica ML 50/1.7 lens- $37

https://www.keh.com/shop/yashica-50mm-f-1-7-ml-c-y-mount-lens-52.html

Extension tubes for Contax/Yashica lenses- about 40 bucks

http://www.ebay.com/itm/made-in-japan-Set-of-Extension-Tubes-12-20-36mm-for-Contax-Yashica-Mount-/252751083751?hash=item3ad92378e7:g:KMsAAOSwUKxYklzx

Canon EOS to CY adapter- 12 bucks

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pixco-Contax-Yashica-CY-Lens-to-Canon-EOS-Adapter-5D-IV-77D-800D-80D-7D-II-6D-1D-/371882112019?hash=item5695e6b413:g:GQoAAOSw2gxYvMjR

Since you wont need auto focusing for macro using an old manual focus lens is perfectly fine. The above combo works by putting the EOS to CY adapter on your camera first. Then you mount up one or two or all three extension tubes depending on how much magnification you want, then just mount the Yashica ML 50/1.7 to the tube. Thats lens, btw, is excellent. So you get a very versatile macro kit for around 90 bucks give or take.

You can finder cheaper combos of course with more digging, and you dont have to go with a CY lens. Like I said there are several old lenses that will adapt to your Canon. Some wont, like old Canon FD/FL or the Konica AR bayonet mount. But many will.

Hope this helps.

 

[J1G4R]

I am overwhelmed by the response I got here.

Thank you for your advices.

I'll try the options you all have mentioned.

Just wanna know the optimal settings under sunlight.

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

Just wanna know the optimal settings under sunlight.

As with every other form of photography, there's no single group of optimal settings. The real difference with macro is that by its nature it gets you very close to your subject. Whatever lens you use the depth of field is proportional to subject distance, so a very short subject distance means a very shallow DOF.

A general principle of the way lenses work is that small apertures lead to softening through diffraction. For your camera the limit for most things would be about f/8-11. But for macro that won't give enough DOF and you'll often need to go down to f/16 or f/22. The good news is that the subject fills so much of the frame that the softening effect hardly shows.

The bad news is that such small apertures don't let much light in. If your subject stays still and you have a tripod (more expense if you haven't) you can use a long exposure. If not you can raise ISO, which brightens the image but can show noise; or you can use flash.

There are two problems using flash for macro. One is that a point source of light creates harsh shadows. The other is that if the flash is on the camera (and unless you buy a separate flash gun it will be) the lens blocks the light so it doesn't reach the subject. However, this time there is a zero cost solution.

This is cut from a translucent (not opaque with white filler) plastic container. The hole is just a snug fit to the front of the lens or hood (I have half a dozen to use with various lenses with or without hood). It's tall to make the light source for the subject as big as possible. It can be rotated slightly to give a certain amount of direction to the light.

Here's a comparison of the shadow effect. Notice that it isn't just the edges on the near leaves - the shadows on the far leaf have completely gone.









--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006

Galleries by Gerry Winterbourne

www.pbase.com

[email protected]

 

[iancrowe]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

You have a number of options which I'll try an list in order of expense.

1) 49mm reversing ring together with your 50mm f/1.8 STM lens. This is probably the cheapest option. The problem is you lose control of the lens aperture. Either shooting wide open (not really a good idea when your dealing with tiny depths of field) or presetting the lens aperture on the camera and then removing the lens while it is stopped down (hold the DoF preview button on while switching camera off). Not really an easy technique and I'm not convinced it does the lens any good.

2) 49mm reversing ring with a manual lens (e.g. Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7). More expensive as you will have to purchase an old manual lens (they are surprisingly cheap via e-Bay/Gumtree/Craigslist) as well as the reversing ring.

3) Cheap extension tubes with your 50mm f/1.8 lens. Not as expensive as people make out, I picked up a set of fully automatic tubes for about £35 (roughly the price of a Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 and a reversing ring). Do not bother with the cheap (less than £10) as they do not allow control of aperture (you're back to presetting the lens as mentioned in option 1). The positives of these are you get full control of aperture, focusing at maximum aperture and focus confirmation. The main drawback with extension tubes is that you can end up with your lens very close to your subject.

4a) Cheap close-up lenses. These are the low cost option but as with all optics you get what you pay for so be prepared for distortion, edge/corner softness, lack of contrast and chromatic aberration.

4b) Expensive close-up lenses e.g. Ranox DCR-250 these produce reasonable results but the price is beginning to intersect with option 5. Plus you are hanging a significant weight off the very front of your lens.

5) Adapted second-hand manual macro lens e.g. Tamron SP Adaptall 2 90mm f/2.5 macro lens. These require some research as a lot of lenses were labelled Macro when they came nowhere near true 1:1 magnification (basically all zoom lenses). Also they come with the hassle of manually stopping the lens down between getting focus and taking the picture.

6) Buying a second-hand Canon/Sigma/Tamron EF mount Macro lens. Most expensive but easiest to use option.

Hope this helps

Ian

 

[J1G4R]

Just wanna know the optimal settings under sunlight.

As with every other form of photography, there's no single group of optimal settings. The real difference with macro is that by its nature it gets you very close to your subject. Whatever lens you use the depth of field is proportional to subject distance, so a very short subject distance means a very shallow DOF.

A general principle of the way lenses work is that small apertures lead to softening through diffraction. For your camera the limit for most things would be about f/8-11. But for macro that won't give enough DOF and you'll often need to go down to f/16 or f/22. The good news is that the subject fills so much of the frame that the softening effect hardly shows.

The bad news is that such small apertures don't let much light in. If your subject stays still and you have a tripod (more expense if you haven't) you can use a long exposure. If not you can raise ISO, which brightens the image but can show noise; or you can use flash.

There are two problems using flash for macro. One is that a point source of light creates harsh shadows. The other is that if the flash is on the camera (and unless you buy a separate flash gun it will be) the lens blocks the light so it doesn't reach the subject. However, this time there is a zero cost solution.

This is cut from a translucent (not opaque with white filler) plastic container. The hole is just a snug fit to the front of the lens or hood (I have half a dozen to use with various lenses with or without hood). It's tall to make the light source for the subject as big as possible. It can be rotated slightly to give a certain amount of direction to the light.

Here's a comparison of the shadow effect. Notice that it isn't just the edges on the near leaves - the shadows on the far leaf have completely gone.



--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]

This is really informative.. Love the idea of diffuser.. Thank you very much..

I hope I can get some better results now...

 

[J1G4R]

Hello pros.

I have canon 1300d with 18-55mm kit and 50mm f1.8 stm lenses.

I read and did YouTube on macro photography and now am confused. Where should i start and what should i buy? Reversal ring, extension tubes?

I cant afford lens upgrade so need to be cost effective.

You have a number of options which I'll try an list in order of expense.

1) 49mm reversing ring together with your 50mm f/1.8 STM lens. This is probably the cheapest option. The problem is you lose control of the lens aperture. Either shooting wide open (not really a good idea when your dealing with tiny depths of field) or presetting the lens aperture on the camera and then removing the lens while it is stopped down (hold the DoF preview button on while switching camera off). Not really an easy technique and I'm not convinced it does the lens any good.

2) 49mm reversing ring with a manual lens (e.g. Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7). More expensive as you will have to purchase an old manual lens (they are surprisingly cheap via e-Bay/Gumtree/Craigslist) as well as the reversing ring.

3) Cheap extension tubes with your 50mm f/1.8 lens. Not as expensive as people make out, I picked up a set of fully automatic tubes for about £35 (roughly the price of a Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 and a reversing ring). Do not bother with the cheap (less than £10) as they do not allow control of aperture (you're back to presetting the lens as mentioned in option 1). The positives of these are you get full control of aperture, focusing at maximum aperture and focus confirmation. The main drawback with extension tubes is that you can end up with your lens very close to your subject.

4a) Cheap close-up lenses. These are the low cost option but as with all optics you get what you pay for so be prepared for distortion, edge/corner softness, lack of contrast and chromatic aberration.

4b) Expensive close-up lenses e.g. Ranox DCR-250 these produce reasonable results but the price is beginning to intersect with option 5. Plus you are hanging a significant weight off the very front of your lens.

5) Adapted second-hand manual macro lens e.g. Tamron SP Adaptall 2 90mm f/2.5 macro lens. These require some research as a lot of lenses were labelled Macro when they came nowhere near true 1:1 magnification (basically all zoom lenses). Also they come with the hassle of manually stopping the lens down between getting focus and taking the picture.

6) Buying a second-hand Canon/Sigma/Tamron EF mount Macro lens. Most expensive but easiest to use option.

Hope this helps

Ian

Well am getting tripod soon so i might get reverse ring and extension tube with that only. I have toto manage the money. But if it gives me better result I will sort it out. Any tips with 18-55 kit lens?

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

5) Adapted second-hand manual macro lens e.g. Tamron SP Adaptall 2 90mm f/2.5 macro lens.

The OP now says he's thinking of something different but in case anyone else reads this here's a note of caution about the Adaptall 90/2.5. The Adaptall website http://www.adaptall-2.com/lenses/52B.html says there are two versions, of which "model 52BB is merely a cosmetically redesigned version of the original 52B".

I'm not sure of the details here but I think there is a more than cosmetic difference. My brother John (a member here) used to have one - may still have it. I think it was the 52B version which, as the diagram shows, has a rear element that is flat facing the sensor.

That's not a problem with film (mat surface to the emulsion) but can cause reflections back and forward between a shiny sensor and the lens. this doesn't matter at larger apertures but shows as a patch at small apertures. You can ignore the EXIF here (I didn't alter the data for a manual lens) but here is the effect at f/2.5 (invisible) and f/22.

These require some research as a lot of lenses were labelled Macro when they came nowhere near true 1:1 magnification (basically all zoom lenses).

The Adaptall 90/2.5 is 1:2 but comes with an adapter that takes it to 1:1.

Also they come with the hassle of manually stopping the lens down between getting focus and taking the picture.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006

Galleries by Gerry Winterbourne

www.pbase.com

[email protected]

 

[over exposed seahorse]

Reversing rings are no fun on Canons because you can't set the f/stop. I would suggest either extension tubes or an achromatic close-up lens. Those will get you started.

Do Canon lenses not have a little lever at the back that you can slide with your finger to manually change aperture? Obviously its still not an exact science, but atleast you can make the aperture wider or narrower depending on what the situation requires?

 

[Leonard Migliore]

Reversing rings are no fun on Canons because you can't set the f/stop. I would suggest either extension tubes or an achromatic close-up lens. Those will get you started.

Do Canon lenses not have a little lever at the back that you can slide with your finger to manually change aperture? Obviously its still not an exact science, but atleast you can make the aperture wider or narrower depending on what the situation requires?

That's Nikon. Canon EF lenses are completely electrically controlled and only have contact blocks on the back.

 

[over exposed seahorse]

Reversing rings are no fun on Canons because you can't set the f/stop. I would suggest either extension tubes or an achromatic close-up lens. Those will get you started.

Do Canon lenses not have a little lever at the back that you can slide with your finger to manually change aperture? Obviously its still not an exact science, but atleast you can make the aperture wider or narrower depending on what the situation requires?

That's Nikon. Canon EF lenses are completely electrically controlled and only have contact blocks on the back.

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

Reversing rings are no fun on Canons because you can't set the f/stop. I would suggest either extension tubes or an achromatic close-up lens. Those will get you started.

Do Canon lenses not have a little lever at the back that you can slide with your finger to manually change aperture? Obviously its still not an exact science, but atleast you can make the aperture wider or narrower depending on what the situation requires?

That's Nikon. Canon EF lenses are completely electrically controlled and only have contact blocks on the back.

Ah thankyou, I was assuming all lenses had one.

From Wikipedia:

Main article: Canon EF lens mount Features of EF-lens

The bayonet-style EF lens mount is at the centre of the EOS camera system. Breaking compatibility with the earlier FD mount, it was designed with no mechanical linkages between moving parts in the lens and in the camera. The aperture and focus are controlled via electrical contacts, with motors in the lens itself. This was similar in some ways to Canon's earlier attempt at AF with the T80. Other manufacturers including Contax (with its G series of interchangeable-lens 35 mm rangefinder cameras), Nikon's 1983 F3AF and Olympus (with its Four Thirds System) have since embraced this type of direct drive system. It is a large lens mount compared to most of its competition, enabling the use of larger aperture lenses.

The Canon EOS means Electro-Optical System. Its introduction seriously upset Canon users when it was introduced - many migrated to Nikon or other makes - but it has always offered several advantages. One of them is Canon's better video performance than the other two DSLR makes (Nikon and Pentax).

 

[John Michael Winterbourne]

Ian is correct about the hassle of manually stopping down an Adaptall lens on Canon EOS, which I understand is the case here - but that isn't for example a problem on my Nikons (or your Pentaxes), that was why the Adaptall concept was so clever in its day. And Canon of course pioneered the electrical versus mechanical approach with the EOS mount.

Buy yes - I still have my first 90/2.5 52B - in fact I have two, because I liked the lens so much that after we'd concluded that the first one was a 'bad copy' I bought another one - with the same result. So I also now have the 52BB (also 90/2.5) and for quite a while I didn't believe the Adaptall-2.com view that it was 'just a cosmetic' upgrade, because the blue spot problem isn't nearly so severe. However, following a discussion on the Adapted Lens Talk Forum, with a very knowledgable member Prof Hank D, I now know that it can be induced in certain lighting conditions, particularly strongly back-lit shots.

The good news is that the blue spot is not an issue for either the 52 lenses provided that the dedicated Macro tube that came with the lenses.

Adaptall-2.com is a good source, but it is incomplete and doesn't include the final Adaptall iteration of a 90 mm macro, which was the 72B 90mm f/2.8 - http://themanualphotographer.co.uk/tamron-adaptall-2-sp-90mm-f2-8-macro-72b/

That gives 1:1 macro without any extension tube, but they are rare and there's not much information on the net about them. I haven't found any reference to the blue spot issue arising with a 72B.

I think that the optical in the 72B hasn't changed significantly in the intervening years (except multi-coating maybe) and is still the basis of Tamron's modern AF 90/2.8s.